Long‐term results of implant‐supported over‐dentures retained by double crowns: a practice‐based retrospective study after minimally 10 years follow‐up

Frisch, Eberhard; Ziebolz, Dirk; Rinke, Sven

doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02568.x

Cited by 51 publications

(82 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This was recognized by previous authors (Frisch, Ziebolz & Rinke, 2013; Trullenque‐Eriksson & Guisado‐Moya, 2014) and obvious from the study of Jensen, Meijer, Raghoebar, Kerdijk and Cune (2017). The latter had a mean follow‐up time of 8 years based on implants in function from 3 years up to 16 years of follow‐up.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 52%

How do peri‐implant biologic parameters correspond with implant survival and peri‐implantitis? A critical review

Doornewaard

Jacquet

Cosyn

et al. 2018

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThe aim of this critical review was to evaluate whether commonly used biologic diagnostic parameters correspond to implant survival and peri‐implantitis prevalence.Materials and methodsPublications from 2011 to 2017 were selected by an electronic search using the Pubmed database of the US National Library of Medicine. Prospective and retrospective studies with a mean follow‐up time of at least 5 years and reporting prevalence of peri‐implantitis as well as mean bone loss and standard deviation were selected. The correlation between reported prevalence of peri‐implantitis and reported implant survival, mean follow‐up time, mean bone loss, mean probing depth, and mean bleeding on probing was calculated. Mean bone loss and standard deviation were used for estimation of proportion of implants with bone loss exceeding 1, 2, and 3 mm.ResultsFull‐text analysis was performed for 255 papers from 4,173 available ones, and 41 met all the inclusion criteria. The overall mean weighted survival rate was 96.9% (89.9%–100%) and the reported prevalence of peri‐implantitis ranged between 0% and 39.7%, based on 15 different case definitions. The overall weighted bone loss was 1.1 mm based on 8,182 implants and an average mean loading time ranging from 5 to 20 years. No correlation was found between mean bone loss and the reported prevalence of peri‐implantitis. The estimated prevalence of implants with bone loss above 2 mm was 23%. The overall weighted mean probing depth was 3.3 mm, and mean weighted bleeding was 52.2%. Only a weak correlation was found between survival and function time (r = −0.49). There was no relation between the probing depth or bleeding and the mean bone loss, mean follow‐up time, and reported prevalence of peri‐implantitis.ConclusionBiologic parameters mean probing depth and mean bleeding on probing do not correlate with mean bone loss and this irrespective of follow‐up. Case definition for peri‐implantitis varied significantly between studies indicating that an unambiguous definition based on a specified threshold for bone loss is not agreed upon in the literature.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 52%

How do peri‐implant biologic parameters correspond with implant survival and peri‐implantitis? A critical review

Doornewaard

Jacquet

Cosyn

et al. 2018

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The cortisol level is widely used in the literature as a varying physiological parameter associated with the presence of stress 29 cases involving the insertion of dental implants and function immediately, i.e., within the same session the patient leaves the dental clinic with prostheses supported by implants, or just with the implant.Naturally, a well-established model in the literature was sought, which led us to choose a chronic-stress model involving physical restraint for 12 hours 11, 13,17,26 . It is currently understood that for successful implant dentistry, certain criteria must be met, including an atraumatic surgical technique, primary stability, implant selection, the quality and quantity of bone 27 , periodic preventive maintenance, and knowledge of the physiological and/ or pathological changes in preexisting conditions 28 . The latter may involve stress.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of chronic stress on implant osseointegration into rat's mandible

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Seven implants in two patients showed peri-implantitis (prevalence: patient-based = 9.1%/ implant-based = 8%). Five dentures were renewed (prosthetic-survival rate 77.3%) The authors concluded that IODs retained with double crowns offer predictable long-term performance with a limited incidence of biological and technical complications [53].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hybrid Prosthetic Treatment of the Edentulous Mandible with Two or Four Implants - A Literature Review

G¹

2014

Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Treatment of an edentulous mandible is an important standard area of indication for implants. The aim of the present study was to discuss various aspects of this very important topic using a literature research and possibly derive a recommendation for hybrid prosthetic treatment of the edentulous mandible.Though evaluation of the literature produced a large number of publications with case histories and survival rates, there were only a few prospective randomised clinical studies that compared different treatment concepts in the edentulous mandible to allow an evidence-based statement.Despite all the limitations imposed on the interpretation of the study, the following statements could be made with regard to implant-supported dentures in the edentulous mandible:Two implants represent the easiest, most inexpensive treatment and are adequate for stabilizing a denture in an edentulous mandible. This type of restoration is easy to maintain for the patient with regard to oral hygiene and surgery stress is reduced to a minimum. The disadvantages of this treatment are increased mobility and instability of the denture in the dorsal region.Apart from increased intraoral comfort, the advantages of treatment using four implants include the stable fit of the denture and the option of immediate restoration.

show abstract

Long‐term results of implant‐supported over‐dentures retained by double crowns: a practice‐based retrospective study after minimally 10 years follow‐up

Abstract: This study indicates that IODs retained with double crowns offer predictable long-term performance with a limited incidence of biological and technical complications.

Cited by 51 publications

References 26 publications

How do peri‐implant biologic parameters correspond with implant survival and peri‐implantitis? A critical review

How do peri‐implant biologic parameters correspond with implant survival and peri‐implantitis? A critical review

Effect of chronic stress on implant osseointegration into rat's mandible

Hybrid Prosthetic Treatment of the Edentulous Mandible with Two or Four Implants - A Literature Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About